Prefix management has been used or recommended in conventional methods and some protocols. However, the conventional methods or protocols have some disadvantages.
In this specification, reference is sometimes made to references cited in full and incorporated by reference at the end of this specification; such references are identified using square brackets in the text.
[RFC4968] provides different IPv6 link models that are suitable for IEEE 802.16 based networks. [RFC4968] also provides analysis of various considerations for each link model. [RFC4968] further includes applicability of each link model under different deployment scenarios. As to IPv6 addressing, a shared link model and a point-to-point link model are commonly used. In the shared link model, an IPv6 prefix is shared by multiple mobile nodes (MN). On the other hand, a prefix is only assigned to one MN in the point-to-point link model. Different mobile nodes (MNs) cannot share a prefix, but an MN may have multiple prefixes.
[RFC5121] specifies addressing and operation of IPv6 over a IPv6 specific part of a packet convergence sub-layer of IEEE Std 802.16e [802.16e]. A point-to-point link model may be used in [RFC5121]. Also, 3GPP and 3GPP2 have adapted the point-to-point link model.
A Proxy Mobile IPv6 protocol enables mobility support to a host without requiring participation of the host in any mobility related signaling as described in [RFC5213]. A point-to-point access link is supported in [RFC5213]. The mobile node and a Mobile Access Gateway (MAG) are assumed to be the only two nodes on the point-to-point access link. Proxy Binding Update and Proxy Binding Acknowledgement are used for prefix authorization among a Local Mobility Anchor (LMA) and the Mobile Access Gateway (MAG).
One protocol [RFC3963] specifies a mechanism for a Mobile Router to synchronize Mobile Network prefixes of the Mobile Router (user) with Home Agents (client) and obtains new prefixes dynamically. However, the protocol does not deal with how to manage the prefix at a backend.
[RFC3633] defines Prefix Authorization (PA) options to provide a mechanism for automated delegation of IPv6 prefixes using the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP). [I-D.ietf-nemo-dhcpv6-pd] describes how DHCPv6 PD can be used by mobile routers and home agents in network mobility.
Yet another protocol defines Prefix Authorization options to provide a mechanism for automated delegation of IPv6 prefixes using the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP). However, this protocol does not have a mechanism for prefix management using Diameter. DHCPv6 prefix authorization is defined in RFX 3633.
Still another protocol [RFC4818] defines Delegated-IPv6-Prefix RADIUS attribute/Diameter Attribute-Value Pair (AVP) such that in DHCPv6, a delegating router can receive prefixes from an Authentication, Authorization and Accounting (AAA) server. In this case, the AAA server passively delegates the prefixes to the delegating router. However, the AAA server does not have any control over the prefixes in cases such as renumbering.
Therefore, there is a need for improvement in prefix management. There is also a need of systems and methods for the application of Diameter prefix authorization in home agents in MIPv6 and NEMO scenario, local mobility anchors in Proxy MIPv6 scenario, or other common access routers, to enable clients including home agents, local mobility anchors, and access routers to manage prefix efficiently.